Lovie isn't taking a coordinator position. He's getting paid head coach money to sit at home. If he takes a coordinator position that money is void.

Oh ok. Well the Saints are going to a 34. Anyone who about the Eagles? Are they switching or staying the same? If they keep to a 43 system, I can see Spags going back and being their DC. If the Eagles switch systems, then I think Spags HAS to take a position coach spot or sit out a year. That would be the way we get him as a LB coach.

Rumor is the Eagles want to switch to a 3-4 defense and want some guy from Georgia as their DC.

I hope Spags comes on board, but like Forenci said, it's highly unlikely. The Giants don't want to step on Fewell's toes with a move like that.

I want it to happen so bad but it won't.

But if he doesn't have a job and has LB coaching experience then he has to be considered. Plus Fewell's contract expires after this upcoming season. So we have to consider the best guy not worry about other coach's toes.

I would like the Eagles to go to a 34. Then that leaves most of the jobs closed. Spags has to either take a year off or settle and work up again. That would be our chance. I would guess Spags is waiting, but I really hope we sign him as a LB coach. Let Fewell go without actually firing him, and then just promote Spags.

So then he'd wait a year? It's not like his stock is high. He got fired as a HC, and was a 1 year wonder at DC. That's 2 kick in the nuts. And now most jobs are taken. So, what would be his options then? Position coach or basically sit out a year, right? Hopefully we extend him a chance to take that spot.

So then he'd wait a year? It's not like his stock is high. He got fired as a HC, and was a 1 year wonder at DC. That's 2 kick in the nuts. And now most jobs are taken. So, what would be his options then? Position coach or basically sit out a year, right? Hopefully we extend him a chance to take that spot.

If he wants to get a position coach job I am pretty sure he can get a better one then defensive assistant even after being fired.

If he wants to get a position coach job I am pretty sure he can get a better one then defensive assistant even after being fired.

But what other one? LB coach he can take if we give him it. Maybe other teams who haven't filled their staff, but I'd assume our franchise would be closer to win unless he goes to like a Pats or whatever.

But what other one? LB coach he can take if we give him it. Maybe other teams who haven't filled their staff, but I'd assume our franchise would be closer to win unless he goes to like a Pats or whatever.

Idk what teams are looking for coaches to fill their staffs. Maybe Andy Reid or some other coach he has history with has a LB coach or DB spot for him.

I have no idea but the point is all we have to offer on our staff at the moment is defensive assistant.

I really don't think he is going to want to take a job like that when I would think other teams will offer jobs a little higher up on the totem pole.

If we really wanted to, we could bring in Spags as just an Assistant Head Coach for a year much like Dick LeBeau with the Bills in 2003 after he got fired from the Bengals and before he returned to the Steelers.

I doubt it happens, but I would like to see Spags on the staff.

It would add a proven aggressive mind to our defensive staff who has proven success with the team.

Looking at how Reese tends to work, we are likely to use free agency to fill gaps and build the team through the draft.

I wouldn't be surprised if we signed one LB in free agency.

It will be intersting to see what happens with resignings and restructuring etc.

Free Agency starts in around six weeks or so and we need to be under the cap by then.

We really won't know our needs until we work out whats happening with the bunch of veterans who's salary/cap number is above market value or which of our free agents we are able to resign before they hit the open market.

Random thought, but how many teams run the 3-4 defense these days? I feel like now it's a vast majority, even with a couple teams reverting back to the 4-3 I feel it's still favorable.

I think it's more beneficial to be a 4-3 team because you really get some guys that only fit in the 4-3. I know BBD has brought that up in the past but as the 3-4 becomes used more and more it's becoming an even bigger advantage.

Random thought, but how many teams run the 3-4 defense these days? I feel like now it's a vast majority, even with a couple teams reverting back to the 4-3 I feel it's still favorable.

I think it's more beneficial to be a 4-3 team because you really get some guys that only fit in the 4-3. I know BBD has brought that up in the past but as the 3-4 becomes used more and more it's becoming an even bigger advantage.

By my reckoning there are 22 base 4-3 teams and 10 base 3-4 teams

Though quite a few of those 4-3 are hybrids using a lot of 3-4 elements. But teams tend to mix it up anyways.

Though quite a few of those 4-3 are hybrids using a lot of 3-4 elements. But teams tend to mix it up anyways.

Either way even fronts don't seem to be in the minority.

NE: 4-3
MIA: 4-3
BUF: 4-3
NYJ: 3-4

CIN: 4-3
CLE: 3-4?
PIT: 3-4
BAL: 4-3

IND: 3-4
TEN: 4-3
JAC: 4-3
HOU: 3-4

KC: 3-4
OAK: 4-3
DEN: 4-3
SD: 4-3

WAS: 3-4
PHI: 3-4?
DAL: 4-3?
NYG: 4-3

CHI: 4-3?
GB: 3-4
DET: 4-3
MIN: 4-3

TB: 4-3
NO: 3-4
ATL: 4-3
CAR: 4-3

STL: 4-3
SF: 3-4
SEA: 4-3
ARI - 3-4?

What you are seeing more and more of is teams switching to a hybrid Cover 2 defense to handle the great passers in the league. I know the Giants do it a lot as does Baltimore and San Fran. It is the only defense that can slow down the Rodgers, Brady's and Payton's of this league.
They'll mix in man to man elements and blitz occasionally but you'll always see 2 deep Safeties.

saw a story on the giants salary cap from big blue view which was very interesting

Quote:

What does it tell us about the 2012 New York Giants? Nothing new, really, but it confirms something we already knew -- the Giants did not get their money's worth from their defensive unit in 2012.

The Giants spent $68.8 million (57 percent) of their 2012 salary cap on defense. That is more money than every NFL team except the Denver Broncos ($70.6 million) spent on defense. Yet, the Giants finished 31st in the league defensively in yardage allowed and 12th in points allowed (21.5 points per game).

The Seattle Seahawks allowed the fewest points in the league (16.5 per game) while spending only $38.5 million on defense, third-lowest in the NFL.

The Giants spent $48.7 million on offense, which was 24th in the league in spending.

So basically we have invested extremely heavily defensively and had an extremely poor result. I don't get why the coaching staff get a pass.